Andrew Wilkie (Clark, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I support the member for Indi's amendments, and I applaud the member for Indi for being such a principled member of this parliament and being prepared to tackle issues like this. I echo the member for Indi when she makes the distinction between, on the one hand, a member for parliament fighting for their electorate and the response of the government to those requests—that is, us fighting for our electorates and being successful—and, on the other hand, governments acting in corrupt ways with systemic pork-barrelling for political gains.

I think it is undeniable that the previous government's sports rorts program was unconscionable and unethical. It should be illegal, and it meets every reasonable definition of corruption. So too does what happened before last year's Tasmanian state election, when the Tasmanian government rolled out $15 million of grants, including to a number of community groups linked to state politicians and their families—for example, a grant of $150,000 to a rowing club of which a family member of a candidate was a member. That is corruption.

I echo the member for Indi's comments, and I also pick up on her point about her conversation with the member for Bass yesterday. I was a part of that conversation. The member for Bass does a really good job representing her community and fighting for her community, and it is quite offensive to the northern Tasmanian members personally when we talk about their electorates being pork-barrelled. I do talk about their electorates being pork-barrelled, and I criticise governments and political parties for pork-barrelling in those areas, but we've got to be careful to keep that as a completely separate matter to good members of parliament fighting for their groups and doing everything they possibly can to get federal funding for their community groups, for infrastructure et cetera.

See this speech in context